JF-17 Thunder: Made for the PAF

[Viper0011.]

So the completion of 16th Jet means we now have first full squadron of BLOCK II ?

You should theoretically have more than 16 jets from Block II.....16 were built as the block II's, but there were upgrades being done at an overhaul facility to start to upgrade some of the block I's to II's avionics.

Some later serial numbers of 10-xxx and 11-xxx should be upgraded too, or are being upgraded. A major sign you can see and tell, would be to see BVR's and AShM's on hard-points.

@Windjammer: Windy, how many Block I JFT's have been upgraded to Block 2 avionics?

 

[Zarvan]

You should, theoretically have more than 16 jets from Block II.....16 were built as the block II's, but there was over being done at an overhaul facility to start to upgrade some of the block I's to II's avionics. Some later serial numbers of 10-xxx and 11-xxx should be upgraded too, or are being upgraded. A major sign you can see and tell, would be to see BVR's and AShM's on hard-points.

Well I hope you are right and I hope soon all BLOCK I are upgraded to BLOCK II standards and BLOCK II production is also increased

 

[VCheng]

Yes, you can. Or at least able to guess with high confidence.

Guessing with high confidence is not the same as determining. But thank you for your explanation. Besides, capturing high frame rate video from multiple angles for later analysis is not the same as watching a flight display and figuring it out.

 

[Viper0011.]

and BLOCK II production is also increased

This part would take time as apparently, there is a new facility being built. This capability to manufacture Jets, is a difference by leaps and bounds within the Pakistani aeronautics industry. So to establish a new industry all together, which requires MANY technologies to run simultaneously and with very high quality, you need many different facilities, testing, R&D centers and more than anything, qualified human capital.

The human / labor part is difficult in Pakistan's case as this is really the first program at such a critical level. Pakistanis are training engineers on the JFT program but you can't just train people and let them build a jet, there is training, re-training and then monitoring until you are sure the new batch could do the job on their own. Small mistake can risk a pilot's life and many millions. So production increase will take time due to the lack of proper trained labor.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Amen to that
we learn every time from his posts

Simply because he has technical knowledge to back up his statements plus he is articulate enough, without any handicaps of being carried away by ego, nah.... Ergo there is very little generalised Guff, have you ever seen @gambit speaking about his exceptional credentials?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Hi,

I read many of Mr Mishra's posts---but left wondering what he wants to prove----.

Sometimes I have the same feeling about my posts as well---just kidding ( to myself )

MK, those posts are (were) part of a conversation that he had directed specifically to @Oscar (just check back to confirm the tags, please); now both he and @Oscar seem to populate the "stratospheric heights" of abstruse scientific technological thought, seemingly not for the plebeians (or 'hoi-polloi'). Thus leading to that recurrent sense of 'wonderment'; or to put into simpler sub-continental argot: "sab kuch bumper jaa raha hai".
You are not yet in that category, janaab; thank heavens for that.

 

[Donatello]

And is not fixing quickly either. It is a double edged sword as the IAF can not(and should not) drop standards but at the same time its salary package is not as competitive as the many airlines that have popped up. A lot of the IAF was "Lost" to Indian airlines. Many opportunists dumped the IAF to the dismay of their seniors and went for greener waters.

So while there have been new intakes, these are matching the numbers of previous years whereas the IAF needs to exceed those numbers. So both being a larger force and a larger economy is hurting the IAF in certain areas.

I think that is not the problem with just the IAF but all over the world. Think about it, beyond 40 years of age, your fighter pilot job is limited anyway, because by that time you are no longer the same physically fit man as you were in your 20s. Most professional athletes will retire around 37-42 year of age, it is a natural phenomena and no matter how good you are, you will naturally lose the edge. Plus, by the time you are 40, you are well into your career, and hopefully moving upwards towards administration job or desk job. A newly OCU jockey puts way more hours in his fighter than say an Air Commodore.....as you move up the ranks you lose that by seat of pant's type flying. So unless you surely want to see yourself in a two or three star rank, you will want to move to a more financially stable future (you know, you have probably 2 kids by now who are growing up fast so you think in a more conservative terms)
Many former RAF pilots fly for BA, so do USAF and USMC pilots for US airlines. Same with PAF......Shaheen air is literally PAF pilots flying club.

And no amount of perks are going to keep one from switching. A government job anywhere in the world cannot compete with private sector one. One is there to serve the nation and other to maximize profits. A retired captain in PIA has made and saved way more than an Air Chief.
A good friend's dad was the batchmate of ACM Kaleem Sadat. Of the two gentleman, one flew for the PAF his entire life and rose to become the ACM, while the other quit in 3 years, flew for PIA for 35 years, and retired as the Captain on the 777 with 6000 hours. The latter was and is more financially sound than the ACM, even though the ACM had more social clout.

What attracts people toward fighter flying is, then, not the paycheck, but rather the experience and the pleasure of doing something that 99% of us would never do. Flying FL550 at Mach2.0 is something really you can't put a price on.

 

[SQ8]

I think that is not the problem with just the IAF but all over the world. Think about it, beyond 40 years of age, your fighter pilot job is limited anyway, because by that time you are no longer the same physically fit man as you were in your 20s. Most professional athletes will retire around 37-42 year of age, it is a natural phenomena and no matter how good you are, you will naturally lose the edge. Plus, by the time you are 40, you are well into your career, and hopefully moving upwards towards administration job or desk job. A newly OCU jockey puts way more hours in his fighter than say an Air Commodore.....as you move up the ranks you lose that by seat of pant's type flying. So unless you surely want to see yourself in a two or three star rank, you will want to move to a more financially stable future (you know, you have probably 2 kids by now who are growing up fast so you think in a more conservative terms)
Many former RAF pilots fly for BA, so do USAF and USMC pilots for US airlines. Same with PAF......Shaheen air is literally PAF pilots flying club.

And no amount of perks are going to keep one from switching. A government job anywhere in the world cannot compete with private sector one. One is there to serve the nation and other to maximize profits. A retired captain in PIA has made and saved way more than an Air Chief.
A good friend's dad was the batchmate of ACM Kaleem Sadat. Of the two gentleman, one flew for the PAF his entire life and rose to become the ACM, while the other quit in 3 years, flew for PIA for 35 years, and retired as the Captain on the 777 with 6000 hours. The latter was and is more financially sound than the ACM, even though the ACM had more social clout.

What attracts people toward fighter flying is, then, not the paycheck, but rather the experience and the pleasure of doing something that 99% of us would never do. Flying FL550 at Mach2.0 is something really you can't put a price on.

Not to deviate too much. But what happened with the IAF was that due to the boom in airlines.. many Flt Lts and Sq Ldr level guys left to start their careers in airlines. See, the IAF paid for their training.. so not only did these people end up leaving the IAF high and dry due to funds but also in terms of manpower.

We also had some pilots leaving for airlines but due to the lesser boom in airlines and generally few destinations; the loss was much less.

MK, those posts are (were) part of a conversation that he had directed specifically to @Oscar (just check back to confirm the tags, please); now both he and @Oscar seem to populate the "stratospheric heights" of abstruse scientific technological thought, seemingly not for the plebeians (or 'hoi-polloi'). Thus leading to that recurrent sense of 'wonderment'; or to put into simpler sub-continental argot: "sab kuch bumper jaa raha hai".
You are not yet in that category, janaab; thank heavens for that.

Humbly huzoor.. I am a nobody in terms of that. Nor do I claim to know it all through actual or spurious experience. All I do is make sure that whatever I believe in, understand and so on and so forth.. isnt some thought cooked up in my head and is grounded in actual theories or verified by MORE than five people in the field or connected with a project.

Basically, you wont find me creating any more threads on "I told you so" or "I know it all" simply because I have little craving for that attention. The same way it would be ridiculous to try and get into an argument with you over harbour pilot or floating vessel design basics without having spoken to at least four maritime folks in detail about the subject and read on it.

Sadly, this is the internet and not a university.. so(and pardon my french).. "Har satya howa laga hota hai ke mujhe sab pata hai".

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Not to deviate too much. But what happened with the IAF was that due to the boom in airlines.. many Flt Lts and Sq Ldr level guys left to start their careers in airlines. See, the IAF paid for their training.. so not only did these people end up leaving the IAF high and dry due to funds but also in terms of manpower.

We also had some pilots leaving for airlines but due to the lesser boom in airlines and generally few destinations; the loss was much less.


Humbly huzoor.. I am a nobody in terms of that. Nor do I claim to know it all through actual or spurious experience. All I do is make sure that whatever I believe in, understand and so on and so forth.. isnt some thought cooked up in my head and is grounded in actual theories or verified by MORE than five people in the field or connected with a project.

Basically, you wont find me creating any more threads on "I told you so" or "I know it all" simply because I have little craving for that attention. The same way it would be ridiculous to try and get into an argument with you over harbour pilot or floating vessel design basics without having spoken to at least four maritime folks in detail about the subject and read on it.

Sadly, this is the internet and not a university.. so(and pardon my french).. "Har satya howa laga hota hai ke mujhe sab pata hai".

Say whatever you will, @Oscar; at the risk of sounding like -------- (oh never mind) you have built up some credibility (in spite of your propensity to speak French ) and thus I've had some of my 'fundas' cleared.

About the earlier part of this post vis-a-vis the IAF; your diagnosis is correct. The IAF has always been the "milch-cow" for the airlines; not just now but even in the days of the Air-India and Indian Airlines duopoly. Any Pilot with 'Multi-Engine" engine experience was fair game...... which meant anybody who flew Super-Connies, Liberators, Illyushins, Antonovs, Packets even the humble Dakota could get "reeled in". And the "cocks-of-the-walk" were Canberra Pilots; because they had Jet Experience! Plus a Service Pilot gets exemption from certain subjects in the DGCA licence exams. So any Transport or Bomber Pilot who got superseded/time-scaled at Sqn.Ldr/WingCo levels had an 'exit-plan'. However it was some-what manageable then. The mushrooming growth of Pvt. Airlines put a real spanner in the works. Even Fighter Jocks and Naviators began to be sought after, so Service Pilots started re-booting their Career Plans accordingly; seeking PR if need be.
Let us see how MoD works that out as part of a long-term plan.

 

[M.Saad Sheikh]

PAC must look forward to create a twin-engine stealth multirole fighter from the WS-13 engine to be used in JF-17 Thunder so as to compete with the other world. It must be given a serious concentration because India is going to get PAK FA very soon. PAC should seek China's cooperation in this regard. Thanks!

 

[SQ8]

Say whatever you will, @Oscar; at the risk of sounding like -------- (oh never mind) you have built up some credibility (in spite of your propensity to speak French ) and thus I've had some of my 'fundas' cleared.

About the earlier part of this post vis-a-vis the IAF; your diagnosis is correct. The IAF has always been the "milch-cow" for the airlines; not just now but even in the days of the Air-India and Indian Airlines duopoly. Any Pilot with 'Multi-Engine" engine experience was fair game...... which meant anybody who flew Super-Connies, Liberators, Illyushins, Antonovs, Packets even the humble Dakota could get "reeled in". And the "cocks-of-the-walk" were Canberra Pilots; because they had Jet Experience! Plus a Service Pilot gets exemption from certain subjects in the DGCA licence exams. So any Transport or Bomber Pilot who got superseded/time-scaled at Sqn.Ldr/WingCo levels had an 'exit-plan'. However it was some-what manageable then. The mushrooming growth of Pvt. Airlines put a real spanner in the works. Even Fighter Jocks and Naviators began to be sought after, so Service Pilots started re-booting their Career Plans accordingly; seeking PR if need be.
Let us see how MoD works that out as part of a long-term plan.

The solution is at their faces if they want to see it. The first is that the IAF needs to realize that even with an increased intake(at the risk of getting some ham fisted fellows) they will still at best get 1:1 ratio for pilot to airplane for the reasons you have already outlined. The best way is to create a program similar to the US ANG; essentially let some people who want to semi-retire do so on the basis that they come fly for the IAF on weekends or other times. the you get then is a pool of flyers that may not be that experienced but will still be well trained. So Wg Command Najmi who left for Kingfisher has to come and fly Mig-27's over the weeked.. keeping his hours current and making sure the newbies are current.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The solution is at their faces if they want to see it. The first is that the IAF needs to realize that even with an increased intake(at the risk of getting some ham fisted fellows) they will still at best get 1:1 ratio for pilot to airplane for the reasons you have already outlined. The best way is to create a program similar to the US ANG; essentially let some people who want to semi-retire do so on the basis that they come fly for the IAF on weekends or other times. the you get then is a pool of flyers that may not be that experienced but will still be well trained. So Wg Command Najmi who left for Kingfisher has to come and fly Mig-27's over the weeked.. keeping his hours current and making sure the newbies are current.

That model is certainly one. The other one is to make larger intake of SSC Officers. As a matter of fact, that is something that many "think-tanks" (incl some that I've some connection with) have been propounding for long. Now, with OROP and its increased financial outlays; that gets even more desirable. One dampener to that has been the Services Outlook towards anybody outside of the PC route, which is absurd. The Indian Armed Forces, esp the IA need some serious re-booting, with some ideas that they can borrow from 'Civvy-Street'.
Not for nothing is the term 'O.G.' some-times used to describe the philosophy of life in the Services.

 

[Blue Marlin]

I have edited my post @Oscar , kindly read it again,I merely wanted to say that JF-17 does NOT incorporate RSS. What it does is something known as "dampers"- it is a kind of control law that makes the plane stable by increasing/decreasing the damping terms to desired value(in normal cases it increases the damping term).
I would really love to read any technical treatise on JF-17 incorporating RSS
As for the reason why LM prefers c++ in F-35- it has something to do availability of a pool of aerospace engineers proficient in C++. Boeing on the other hand has made ADA a norm.

Secondly once you have developed your control law in either C++ or ADA you would need a test facility on ground to test your control algorithms - something known as "IRON BIRD".This set up has everything from flight sensors,actuators etc and is commonly used to validate your control laws. Your quadruplex control is tested here. I dont think there is one such facility in pakistan.



That is absolutely correct

well c++ can be a good substitue language for ada as you said quiet simply its easy of use. and to be quiet honest c++ can replace ada as long as if the code structure is the same as ada. i.e lock down all of the varibales once used and ensure no function, method, class does not have an open negative clauses. but i can see why millitary application are prefrabley coded in ada due to it being very strict, robust, and unforgiving. i would pick c++ over anything else as its easy. why make you life hard when it can be easy. i can code ada and its a good language but is somthing i dont like using. also note that in regards to testing. the testing phase should takes the same amount of time it took to develop the application/code. i am not talking about testing on airframes or in your case the iron bird, to test software, this is for system based applications only where it does not controll any peripherals.

 

[MilSpec]

Let us see how MoD works that out as part of a long-term plan.

Pay Better.

 

[SSGcommandoPAK]

i just wanna ask.. is SU-35 better for PAF? What exactly can be its biggest disadvantage besides integration to C4IS.
I heard about op orchard.. Isrealis jammed Syrian air defense. Tehy can probably jam also US made weapons (used by pak) when necessary..And india cna be given that tech too by Isreral.. So w'd it eb beter having russian, chinese and our own avionics, radars etc so all cannot be blind in any case of aggression ??
Is russian su-35 pak deal real?
1. Is it to lure in indians
2. Or they can really give to pak as Russia-china close ties. (100+ billion $) deal for oil pipeline between 2 countries.
3. Is it the punishment to india for not choosing Su-35 over western fighters.
4. Or its not teh Soviet Union but a russia. Now its not a "2 Block" game anymore.

Maintenance could be a big problem